S MOHAMMED NIZAR Vs. GANESAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed against the fair and decreetal order passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority/Sub Court, Ramanathapuram in RCA.No.18/2013 dated 21.06.2017 confirming the fair and decreetal order of eviction passed by the Rent Controller/District Munsif Court, Ramanathapuram, in RCOP.No.19/2008 dated 04.10.2013.

(2.) The revision petitioner is the tenant and the respondents are landlords. The petitioner/tenant stated that the petition mentioned property originally belonged to one Mary Sahaya Josephin and he was inducted a tenant for the monthly rent of Rs.8,000/- and he is running a hotel in the demised premises under the name and style of ''Kurinji''. Thereafter, the demised premises was sold to one Kulanthairaj and the petitioner became tenant under him and the rent was paid to the said Kulanthairaj and also through his brother, for which, no receipts were issued. Though initially monthly rent was fixed as Rs.1,000/-, subsequently it was raised to Rs.3,000/- and there was no default in payment of rent and the petitioner paid rent to Kulanthairaj till September 2006 and thereafter, no one had come to receive the rent. The rental amount for October and November 2006 sent through money order was returned and therefore, the petitioner deposited the arrears of monthly rent in his Savings Bank Account. While so, the respondents herein illegally tried to disconnect the electricity service connection and only then, the petitioner came to know about the sale of the petition property and thereafter, the petitioner offered monthly rent to the respondents which was refused and that the monthly rent from the month of October 2006 till July 2007 sent through Demand Draft was returned. Therefore, the petitioner filed RCOP.No.6/2008 to deposit the rent and contended that there was no wilful default and the demand of the respondents was not bonafide and therefore, prayed for dismissal of the eviction petition.

(3.) The respondents would contend that they purchased the petition mentioned property from the said A.S.Kulanthai Raj by a sale deed dated 011.2006 and they informed the revision petitioner about their desire to start a textile shop and they demanded the petitioner to vacate the building. According to the respondents, the revision petitioner promised to vacate the petition building within one month, but he did not do so. Hence, the respondents filed a petition for eviction in RCOP.No.19/2008 before the Rent Controller/District Munsif Court, Ramanathapuram, contending that the petition mentioned building is a old one and located in the prime commercial area and that the respondents are running a textile showroom at Salai Street, Ramanathapuram in a rental building and they are not having any other non residential building and that they are also having sufficient means to demolish the petition building and reconstruct a new building to start business.